From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n2CDBYUQ077379 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:11:55 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 726A01C38922 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 06:11:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.redhat.com (mx2.redhat.com [66.187.237.31]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id aEio5PJuYHmlBVUO for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 06:11:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49B9097C.1070003@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:09:16 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LWN article: ext4 and data loss References: <200903121239.35442@zmi.at> In-Reply-To: <200903121239.35442@zmi.at> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Michael Monnerie Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Michael Monnerie wrote: > http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/322823/e6979f02e5a73feb/ > > Very good, maybe similar patches for XFS would help? > IANA Coder, but could be a hint. > > mfg zmi > ext4 is taking its hints from XFS in this regard, not the other way around. XFS dealt with this long ago. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs